tv The Rachel Maddow Show MSNBC November 8, 2012 1:00am-2:00am PST
>> that is "the ed show" and i'm ed schultz. i guess this is what winning feels like. it feels pretty good. it's sure a heck of a lot different than 2004. "the rachel maddow show" begins right now. great work last night. >> thank you. you look as fresh as a daisy. i feel like i've been run over by a truck. you look ten years younger than you did yesterday. >> my key, forget what sleep is all about and it kind of wears on you. >> i hear you. thanks, man, appreciate it. and thanks to you for staying with us this hour. uh, that happened! that really happened. we are not going to have a supreme court that will overturn roe versus wade. there will be no more antonin scalias and samuel aleatos added to this court. we're not going to repeal health reform. nobody is going to kill medicare and make old people in this generation or any other generation fight it out on the open market to try to get health insurance.
we are not going to do that. we are not going to give a 20% tax cut to millionaires and billionaires and expect programs like food stamps and kid's insurance to cover the cost of that tax cut. we'll not make you clear it with your boss if you want to get birth control under the insurance plan that you're on. we are not going to redefine rape. we are not going to amend the united states constitution to stop gay people from getting married. we are not going to double guantanamo. we are not eliminating the department of energy or the department of education or housing at the federal level. we are not going to spend $2 trillion on the military that the military does not want. we are not scaling back on student loans, because the country's new plan is that you should borrow money from their parents. we are not vetoing the dream act. we are not self-deporting. we are not letting detroit go bankrupt. we are not starting a trade war with china on inauguration day in january. we are not going to have, as a president, a man who once led a mob of friends to run down a scared, gay kid, to hold him
down and forcibly cut his hair off with a pair of scissors while that kid cried and screamed for help and there was no apology, not ever. we are not going to have a secretary of state, john bolton. we are not bringing dick cheney back. we are not going to have a foreign policy shop stocked with architects of the iraq war. we are not going to do it. we had the chance to do that if we wanted to do that, as a country. and we said no, last night, loudly. now, to be fair. if you are a conservative or if you are rooting for the republicans, a few things did go your way. republicans did not lose that senate seat that they might have lost in arizona. jon kyl's old senate seat goes to another republican, to jeff flake. also, republicans did not lose that other senate seat they might have lost in nevada, the old jon ensign seat that was given to dean heller. it stays with him. and while president obama carried 28 states last time, he carried 26 or 27 states this time, depending on how florida goes.
that means republicans did lose everything else, but got back indiana and also north carolina. so it was not a totally hopeless night for republicans. also, hey, remember the crazy thaddeus mccotter seat in michigan, where thaddeus mccotter screwed up and they had to run this reindeer herder, santa claus impersonator for the seat, a guy whose own brother says he's crazy. that guy won. the shirtless reindeer guy won. so the republicans have him. big picture in the house, thanks mostly to redistricting the republicans were not in danger of losing the house, and they didn't legal cause it, even though the republican majority appears to have shrunk there. and even though they did get the reindeer guy. but in terms of, honestly, of what went well for republicans in this election, that was pretty much it. it is a short list. want to talk about what went well on the other side last night? i'm actually going to pause for
a second to give you a chance to hit pause on your dvr in case you want to go make popcorn or something? maybe mix a drink. you'll want to settle in for this. so get comfortable. i'll give you a second. ♪ celebrate good times ♪ come on you back? we ready? so last night, the democratic senator, who was supposed to be the most endangered incumbent in the country not only won, she won by 16 points. republican senator scott brown of massachusetts, who was so stuffed with hedge fund misunderstood that he burped credit default swaps. scott brown lost by a lot to the nation's foremost authority on the economic rights of the middle class. after marriage rights for same-sex couples were voted down in state after state after state for years, more than 30 times in a row, this year, all change in maine, they voted on marriage equality and they voted for it. in maryland, they voted on marriage equality and they voted for it. in minnesota, they were asked to vote against marriage equality, and minnesota refused to ban it. in washington state, the vote is not called yet. they are still counting the vote and we will be watching it closely, but if you are on the pro-gay right side in washington state, it should be noted that
it is looking pretty good. in iowa, anti-gay activists were sure that they were going to turf out a judge for ruling in favor of marriage equality. they had done it before, to a bunch of other judges. they had been successful every time they had tried before. but not this one, not this time. judge wiggins in iowa keeps his seat. nevada elects its first african-american congressman this year. america gets our first openly gay united states senator. america gets our first-ever asian american woman senator from hawaii. her seat in the house, i should note, gets filled by this woman, a democratic iraq war veteran. time going to tell you right now that her name is tulsy gabboard, because she is on the fast track to being very famous some day. speaking of iraq war veterans, tammy duckworth, veteran helicopter pilot, lost both her
legs in congress, she is going to congress and sending home the opponent who mocked her for her war record, joe walsh. california relaxed its three strikes you're out law and rejected a law to cripple the power of unions. criminal legalization of marijuana was approved in washington and montana. sherrod brown and jon tester both won, held on to their seats. democrats won a senate seat in north dakota, of all places, a seat that nobody thought they could win. all of these states that had this hugely aggressive total republican takeover from the 2010 elections, ohio and wisconsin, and michigan, and pennsylvania and virginia and florida, all of those states that went so red in state government in these past couple of years and that then had these big fights inside their states over how republicans were governing there, in ohio, wisconsin, michigan, pennsylvania, virginia, and we
will see about florida, last night not only did republicans lose the presidential election in every single one of those states, republicans lost the senate race in every single one of those states too. sherrod brown, tammy baldwin, debbie stabenow, bob casey, tim kaine, bill nelson. depending on florida, a democratic sweep of the presidency, and definitely a democratic sweep of the senate races. in those states that the gop was so excited to have supposedly turned red in a way that was going to stick. last night, democratic women swept every major office in new hampshire. last night, california democrats wanted democratic super majority in the state house and in the state senate. not just majorities in california, but super majorities. wherein, if the republicans don't turn up, any of them, any day at work, nothing will be different in california. they're completely legislatively irrelevant. alan west lost a seat. more women got elected to the u.s. senate than at any time in u.s. history. the republican presidential nominee and vice presidential nominee both lost their home states.
missouri and montana and west virginia chose democratic governors. west virginia chose its first gay state legislature. so did north dakota. west virginia and north dakota? yeah, seriously. joe lieberman's old seat went to a real democrat in connecticut. the proportion of young people voting compared to 2008, it went up. same with african-americans, up from 2008. same with latinos, up from 2008, not down, up. if you are a liberal or if you are rooting for the democrats, last night was a very, very, very big night. and, oh, yeah, this happened. president barack obama, yes, will go down in history as our nation's first african-american president. but he will also go down in history as the most successful democratic presidential candidate since fdr. president clinton got re-elected too, i know, but only barack obama got re-elected with not just big electoral college margins, but also with majority
wins in the popular vote, twice. the guy who predicted this outcome, almost exactly, is nate silver, of course, who writes the political statistics blog, 538 at "the new york times." for accurately predicting, it appears, the exact outcome of the race, and i mean down to every single state. we'll see about florida. nate was, of course, pilloried, pilloried on the right and by right-leaning beltway media types, including politico.com, for having the audacity to print what his poll averages told him was about to happen. but nate was right, the polls were right, even without florida being decided, we now know that president obama won in pretty much exactly the way the state-by-state polls said he was going to win. he won with more than 300 electoral votes. it was not magic, it was just math. math that was completely invisible to the political right. >> i believe the minimum result will be 53-47 romney, over 300 electoral votes, and the republicans will pick up the senate. i base that on just years and
years of experience. >> the wild card and what i've projected, i'm projecting minnesota to go for romney. >> karl, i'm with you. i think you're more optimistic. i've got this romney three poisons. >> i think ohio is going to be a squeaker, maybe an 80, 100, 110,000 vote margin, but i think the republicans are likely to take it. >> who's going to win this election? charles krauthammer, your best prediction? >> romney, very close, but he'll win the popular by, i think, about half a point, electoral college, i think probably a very narrow margin. >> it will be the biggest surprise in recent american political history. it will rekindle a whole question as to why the media played this race as a nail biter, where, in fact, i think romney's going to win by quite a bit. >> i'm now predicting a 330 electoral vote landslide. yes, that's right.
330 electoral votes. >> yes, that's right. no, it's not. wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong. but republican conservatives really believed this stuff. they were talking each other into it a little bit, but it's not like they were faking it. they were so, so, so, so sure that they were win. they were so sure that these policy must be wrong and that they must be right. and when the real math of the real world came barreling out of the dark at them last night, they hid from it. they could not believe it. >> fox news can now project that president obama will win the crucial battleground state of ohio. >> that's the one we've all been waiting for. uh, and there's a question now, about, you know, is it -- what does that mean, panel? does that mean -- >> that's the president -- >> do you believe that ohio has been settled? >> no, i don't. i've got the director of the ohio campaign for romney on the
other end of the line, refreshing the page every few seconds. i think this is premature. we've got to be careful about calling things when we have like 991 votes separating the two candidates and a quarter of the vote yet to count. >> well, folks -- so maybe not so fast. >> here's what we're going to do. karl rove said that we should figure out what the deal is with this decision desk. the decision desk is in a different place. megan, i will escort you down the steps here, so you can go and interview them. >> such a gentleman. >> all right. >> watch your step. >> thank you, thank you, i don't want to fall in front of all of these millions of people. >> okay. >> all right. >> megan is going to go to the decision desk and interview them. >> they're way down the hall. so we'll do a little interrogation and see if they stand by their call. >> this is the decision desk. now we're in the heart of the decision desk room. you tell me whether you stand by your call on ohio, given the doubts karl rove just raised? >> we're actually quite comfortable with the call in ohio. >> what do you make of it, chris? >> there just aren't enough republican votes left. >> percent certainty? >> 99.95%. >> okay.
all right. well, there you have it. >> okay, megan. karl, karl -- karl, he's coming up here to the desk, crunching numbers, writing furiously, pointing at bill hemmer. a lot of things are going on right now. >> all i'm saying is, look, we've had one instance when things were prematurely called. it seems to me to be a very early call. >> the folks at obama headquarters in chicago, they're not listening to karl. they don't care about what karl said. >> ohio really did go to president obama last night. and he really did win. and he really was born in hawaii. and he really is legitimately president of the united states, again. and the bureau of labor statistics did not make up a fake unemployment rate last month. and the congressional research service really can find no evidence that cutting taxes on rich people grows the economy. and the polls were not screwed to oversample democrats. and nate silver was not making up fake projections about the election to make conservatives feel bad. nate silver was doing math. and climate change is real.
and rape really does cause pregnancy sometimes. and evolution is a thing. and benghazi was an attack on us, it was not a scandal by us. and nobody is taking away anyone's guns. and taxes have not gone up. and the deficit is dropping, actually. and saddam hussein did not have weapons of mass destruction. and the moon landing was real. and fema is not building concentration camps. and you and election observers are not taking over texas. and moderate reforms of the regulations on the insurance industry and the financial services industry in this country are not the same thing as communism. listen, last night was a good night for liberals and for democrats for very obvious reasons, but it was also, possibly, a good night for this country as a whole. because in this country, we have a two-party system in government. and the idea is supposed to be that the two sides, both come up with ways to confront and fix the real problems facing our country. they both propose possible solutions to our real problems. and we debate between those
possible solutions. and by the process of debate, we pick the best idea. that competition between good ideas from both sides about real problems in the real country should result in our country having better choices, better options, than if only one side is really working on the hard stuff. and the if the republican party and the conservative movement and the conservative media is snuck a vacuum-sealed door-locked spin cycle of telling each other what makes them feel good and denying the factual, lived truth of the world, then we are all deprived as a nation of the constructive debate about competing feasible ideas about real problems. last night the republicans got shellacked, and they had no idea it was coming. and we saw them in realtime, in real humiliating time, not believe it, even as it was happening to them. and unless they are going to is secede, they are going to have to pop the factual bubble they have been so happy living inside
if they do not want to get shellacked again, and that will be a painful process for them, but it will be good for the whole country, left, right, and center. you guys, we're counting on you. wake up. there are real problems in the world. there are real, knowable facts in the world. let's accept those and talk about how we might approach our problems differently. let's move on from there. if the republican party and the conservative movement and conservative media are forced to do that by the humiliation they were dealt last night, we will all be better off as a nation. and in that spirit, congratulations, everybody. big night. [ female announcer ] over every holiday season
so there was this job that nobody wanted in the united states senate. they literally could not fill the job, because there was no way a person could succeed in that job, and if you're in the u.s. senate, you want to succeed. so nobody would take -- nobody would take the job. well, today the poor woman who they finally suckered into taking that job is a super genius hero of the year. that amazing story is next.
in the fall of 2010, the democratic party needed to appoint somebody to run the part of the party that is responsible for electing democrats to the u.s. senate. harry reid offered the job to virginia senator mark warner. mark warner said, no. harry reid offered the job to minnesota senator, al franken. al franken said, no. he then offered the job to new york senator, chuck schumer. chuck schumer said, no. nobody wanted this job. finally, on his fourth try, he convinced someone to take this terrible, terrible job. poor patty murray. the senator from washington state. look at this.
democrats beseech murray to take the job. nobody wants to be set up for failure. nobody wants to take on a job at which they are almost guaranteed to fail. and in 2010, the job of trying to secure democratic control of the senate in this year's election, seemed like a completely impossible prospect. look at this. democrats face an extremely tough map in 2012. the democrats must defend 23 seats while just ten republicans are up for re-election. no way, right? odds totally stacked against the democrats. no way democrats can hold the senate under those circumstances. that is how it looked when poor patty murray had to be beseeched into taking that job. it's not how it turned out. >> when harry asked me to take this on, there was not one, and i mean, no one who gave us a chance of keeping the majority. we played offense every day and we never let up and now joe donnelly and tammy baldwin and tim kaine, elizabeth warren, chris murphy, maizie orowno,
they're all coming to join us in the senate. and along, of course, sherrod brown and bob casey and bill nelson, amy klobuchar, kirsten gillibrand, joe manchin, debbie stabenow, bob menendez, sheldon whitehouse, bernie sanders, maria cantwell, diane finestein, we have delivered to you a great caucus, mr. leader. >> not only did every democratic incumbent in the senate win their race last night, every single one, but democrats actually picked up two seats. elizabeth warren defeated republican incumbent scott brown in massachusetts. joe donnelly defeated tea party favorite, richard mourdock, in indiana. it should have been impossible. joining us now is steve kornacki, co-host of "the cycle," 3:00 weekdays here on msnbc. happy aftermath, steve. >> i was just checking unskewedelectionreturns.com and they said republicans have 67 senate seats now, so i'm not
sure what you're talking about here. >> also, mitt romney won with a anonymous vote. >> yes, in d.c., that's right. >> that's right. what happened yesterday in the senate specifically? obviously, the expectations were leaning much more toward the democrats by the time we actually voted, but the distance between patty murray having to be essentially arm twisted into taking that job and what happened last night, what happened? >> you could have put a headline from something i wrote in 2010 up there, because i was saying there was no chance for the democrats after the last election too. but what you can see now, it's a reflection of the conclusions the republicans drew from the 2008 election and the actions they took over the last four years. the conclusion they drew was obama became president because we weren't conservative enough. that's how they defined themselves over the next four years. we're going to be as conservative as possible and on a purity crusade within the party. that means the anything who wreaks of the establishment, anyone who voted for t.a.r.p., cannot win a republican primary. so that directly and indirectly affected what happened last night.
the direct impact is pretty obviously. you can see it in indiana and missouri. you had two candidates who would have the no won republican primaries in the pre-obama era. they won republican primaries, behaved like fringe candidates, and scared off fringe voters. but the indirect impact is seeing candidates like mourdock and akin and back in 2010, sharron angle start winning these primaries, it told candidates who would be strong republican candidates, the party can't deliver me the nomination, and made them sit on the sidelines. or took candidates who would be strong candidates and decided to run anyway and made them weak candidates. a good example was tommy thompson in wisconsin. should be the dream nominee. but to make sure the republican party base didn't revolt against him, he and went told the tea party group this year he wanted to phase out medicare. well, it was taped, popped up in the general election, you lose because of that. think of scott brown in
massachusetts. very rare for a republican to win in massachusetts. brown did it in 2010. he voted for the blunt amendment this year and that became a big issue because -- so you even had candidates like scott brown and tommy thompson who could not be the strong candidates they should have been, and that has everything to do with the direction the republican party chose to go. >> here is the thing i think is -- i totally agree with all of that. and this is the thing i don't understand. this is not the first election cycle in which we have seen this dynamic at work. they had a dress rehearsal of how this was going to go in 2010, when they had sharron angle and christine o'donnell and lost all of those senate seats they should have won. why wasn't there any sort of effect on the republican -- the internal processes in the republican party, that made them not want to make that mistake again? >> they won 60-something house seats, all these governorships, all these state legislatures, they were able to re-draw congressional maps, they were able to do scott walker in wisconsin, john kasich in ohio. i think they won so much that there were people in the party who were -- >> don't care about delaware. >> who could have maybe got the senate seat, but it wasn't the situation if they were in the house, they would have had total power.
they really looked at that and said, all that's missing now, we've got this unlosable senate setup in 2012, obama, the weakened candidate, so we'll take him out too and have that complete control and do it all our way. and obviously that's not going to happen. >> and unlosable became losable. and now we have to see, the thing that's going to be fascinating, watching the republicans pick somebody to run their republican senate campaign for two years from now, watching what they do in terms of their own leadership fights, what these guys believe about the right direction to go. if jim demint ends up taking a leadership job in this republican party, or mitch mcconnell stays there, the way mitch mcconnell is talking right now, i think it means they haven't learned these lessons and aiming at something other than a majority. they're aiming at something else. >> that used to be, to take that job, running the party campaign committee is a career-making step in washington. and i think there was a report today, supposedly, marco rubio was being talked about, to run the committee for the republicans in the next cycle, that has no interest in doing it. you can't recruit candidates and say, we're going to put our support behind you.
they're going to still lose the primary. >> it's a lose/lose situation in terms of those internal dynamics. steve kornacki, ow also seem very spry today, like ed. >> lots of caffeine. i'm going to crash this weekend. >> i understand. all right. thanks, steve. all right, so, how did the unfortunate comments about rape caucus do in last night's elections? surprisingly poorly. that very cheery story is coming up next.
okay. if you were karl rove today and your caller i.d. showed an number with an area code 702, would you answer it, hit ignore, perhaps throw your cell phone in the nearest deep body of water and sprint in the opposite direction. 702 is the area code for las vegas, where sheldon adelson lives. do you think karl rove is taking his calls today? what sheldon adelson's hundreds of millions of dollars did not buy, a story coming up. the susan b. anthony list is an anti-abortion group that supports conservative candidates for office. here's what the susan b. anthony list says was the mistake republicans made in this year's elections. >> what we had, unfortunately, was a de facto truce on social issues.
the susan b. anthony list is an anti-abortion group that supports conservative candidates for office. here's what the susan b. anthony list says was the mistake republicans made in this year's elections. >> what we had, unfortunately, was a de facto truce on social issues. a de facto truce on social issues, on one side, but a full embrace of the war on social issues on the other side. republicans have a truce, obama launched a war over abortion. voters overwhelmingly disagreed with those extreme positions, of the president and the democratic party. moving forward, the republican party and its candidates must expose and exploit those vulnerabilities. >> see, if you ask the anti-abortion activists, the only reason republicans lost this year, the only reason mitt romney is not president-elect right now, is because he was not anti-abortion enough. the group says, in its own internal polling of likely swing voters, that polling proves that the reason republicans did so poorly, is because republicans this year were not anti-abortion enough.
which is funny, because actual exit polling from the actual election yesterday, shows that 59% of voters think that abortion should be legal in this country, which is the position of president obama and the majority of democratic candidates. and that is a 23-point advantage over the number of voters who think abortion should be illegal, which is the position of mitt romney and most republican candidates. so on an issue where two-thirds of the electorate thinks you are wrong, the anti-abortion movement says the secret is that you should campaign more on what everybody thinks you're wrong about. the numbers get even worse for republicans among latinos.
yes, on this issue specifically. where less than a third of latino voters say they agree with the dominant republican position on this issue. after the republicans won a record number of state legislature states in 2010 and a bunch of governorships too, republicans in those states, since the 2010 election, have just been focused on abortion, like never before. they enacted a record number of new anti-abortion laws, more than at any time since roe versus wade became the law of the land. the same thing happened at the federal level, as soon as republicans took control of the house, after the 2010 mid-term elections. hr-3, as in the house republican's third bill overall, their bill was an anti-abortion bill. they have also tried to ban abortion after a certain time limit in washington, d.c. they've tried to roll back access to birth control. and remember when they threatened to shut down the entire government if they were not allowed to defund planned parenthood? where they were in power between the 2010 elections and the 2012 elections, republicans governed very, very, very aggressively on this issue. they governed so aggressively on this issue, it was
unprecedented. what happened then, though, was that m ds decided that they were going to make the republicans explain themselves. democrats decided they were going to hold republicans to account for what they had been doing in terms of their governance and philosophy on this issue. and what they planned to keep doing if americans elected them again. and when republicans started to answer specifically appointed questions about their issue on abortion, some creepy stuff happened this year. we learned a great deal, very creepy detail about what republicans really do believe about this issue they've been so energized about. >> even when life begins in that horrible situation of rape, that it is something that god intended to happen. >> there's no such exception as life of the mother. and as far as health of the mother, same thing. >> on the rape thing, it's like, how does putting more violence on to a woman's body and taking
the life of an innocent child that's not -- that's a consequence of this crime, how does that make it better? you know what i mean? >> but she has to live with the consequence of that crime. >> well, that's -- i know. you know, crime as consequences. >> if it's a legitimate rape, the female body has ways to try to shut that whole thing down. >> what is your percentage of abortions to rape? >> it is a tiny, tiny percent. >> 20,000 pregnancies every year from rape. >> how many abortions? millions. >> that's 20,000 rapes. that's 20,000 people who were violated? >> i know. i know. >> why would you force a woman who's been raped to have to have that baby? >> you know, like i say, jim, i mean, my position is pro-life and, you know, i care about the unborn and i feel that, you know, that's really where we should be in our policy. >> what would the appropriate
sentence be, shall we put her in jail? should we fine her? do you have any thoughts on that at all? >> you know, those are things that need to be worked out through the, you know, through the legislative process. >> do you believe that a woman should be forced by the government to give birth to a rapist's baby against her will? >> uh, i've always in my career and to this day been loyal to the principle of life. i'm pro-life. i'm profoundly pro-life. i'm pro-life to my core. >> should it be legal for a woman to be able to get an abortion -- >> well, so, i'm very proud of my pro-life record and i've always adopted the idea, the position that the method of conception doesn't change the definition of life. >> how would you tell a daughter or a granddaughter who, god forbid, would be the victim of a rape, to keep the child against her own will? >> i lived something similar to that with my own child. she chose life.
and i commend her for that. she knew my views, but, uh, fortunately for me, i didn't have to -- she chose the way i thought. don't get me wrong, it wasn't rape, but similar. >> similar how? >> um, having a baby out of wedlock. you know? >> that's similar to rape? >> no, no, no, but -- well, put yourself in a father's position, yes. i mean, it is similar. >> that was a video sampling from the republican party's creepy rape and abortion comments caucus. those guys were essentially forced by precise and persistent lines of questioning in this election season to campaign on their anti-abortion positions. forced to explain themselves, even when they did not want to, because, frankly, democrats pushed them on it. so how did these guys do in last night's election? they did very, very, very badly. the creepy rape and abortions caucus by our count went 0 for 9 last night. every one of those guys you just heard from lost last night. richard mourdock, who thinks god
sometimes intervenes to make sure rape victims are impregnated by their rapists, he lost the senate race. and joe walsh who thinks that abortion should be banned for women whose lives and or health is in danger, joe walsh lost to tammy duckworth. john "the rape thing" coster, he lost his race for the house in washington state. todd "legitimate rape" akin, he lost the senate race against claire mccaskill, which was once considered an easy republican senate pickup. republican rosco bartlett, who did not have the stats handy on pregnancies resulting from rape, he lost his re-election bid in jand. rick berg who said we can work out the details later of whether rape victims go to jail for abortion, he lost. john mcgovern who doesn't want to talk about rape, he just wants to talk about his pure, pro-life core, he lost to bernie sanders in vermont.
paul ryan, who called rape just another method of conception, paul ryan did win back his house seat, but he lost the vice presidency in rather spectacular fashion. and tom smith, who thinks getting pregnant out of wedlock is totally similar to getting pregnant by being raped, just put yourself in the father's position, he lost his u.s. senate bid to incumbent democratic senator bob casey of pennsylvania. republicans who were forced to campaign on their anti-abortion politics, by and large, did not fare well this year. but by all means, republicans, follow the anti-abortion movement's advice and campaign harder on your abortion politics next time. really. really, go for that one third of the electorate that thinks they agree with you on this issue before they've heard you really explain it. maybe you can petition to change the rules of mathematics so that 36% will add up to a majority. regardless, definitely talk more about rape, you guys. keep it up.
hey, to all of you who waited in long, long, long lines to cast your vote in this election, your democracy thanks you, yay! how about this. let's never have to do that again. let's fix that. who's with me? that's next. you can prevent gas with beano meltaways, or treat gas with these after you get it. now that's like sunblock before or sun burn cream later. oh, somebody out there's saying, now i get it! take beano before and there'll be no gas.
in south phoenix, arizona, yesterday, a voter named gabriel melonco needed four trips to the polls before he was allowed to vote. poll workers could not find his registration, and then they would not accept his i.d. in chicago, voters got sent from polling place to polling place, in some cases, berated by
election judges, given the wrong ballots. in orangeberg county, south carolina, voters were asked for their party affiliation, even though voters in south carolina do not register by party. in pennsylvania, one poor guy voted for barack obama, but the machine flipped his support to mitt romney, before his very eyes. in detroit, michigan, gena porter turned up to vote yesterday at 5:00 a.m. she discovered 200 people had beaten her to the line. 5:00 a.m. in racine, wisconsin, they ran out of ballots, which makes it awfully hard to vote. in florida, republicans cut the days for early voting in half. then early voters in miami had to wait while clerks printed out several pages of the ballot for each voter. it took until 1:00 in the morning for miami's last early voting voter to actually vote and took them until 1:00 a.m. on election day as well, waits of seven hours and more. with lines of a dizzying length in florida and virginia and ohio and maryland and north carolina and nevada and indiana, this was the stay in line election. people urging voters to please stay in line.
no matter who you're voting for, stay in line, do not give up. #stayinline. not for any partisan outcome, but for the sake of your right the to vote. your heroism and patriotism were inspiring. you were going to vote, doggone it, no matter what. by making that sacrifice, you, you may have inspired change, or at least the chance for change. >> i want to thank every american who participated in this election. whether you voted for the very first time or waited in line for a very long time -- by the way, we have to fix that. >> i don't know if that was an an lib or not, but my heart leapt, "by the way, by the way
we have to fix that." could we? elections are a state affair. those mistakes are made by the state. to the extent that those problems are the product of bad election rules and regulations, those are generally state rules and regulations. can president obama or congress fix all these horrendous state-level problems with voting? can we reach a consensus on what those problems are? is there a technocratic nonpartisan solutions here that could solve this problem for the country and make our right to vote not part of partisan campaigning? and if we cannot fix it now, after the stay-in-line election, when else could we ever fix this? why couldn't we do this now? joining us now for the interview is rick haszen, a professor of law at uc irvine, and the author of "the voting wars" from 2000 to the next voting meltdown, thanks for being here. glad we were able to get you on the show. >> great to be with you. >> what i do you think the lines
are so damned. then early voters in miami not part of partisan campaigning? and if we cannot fix it now after the stay in line election, when else could we ever fix this? why wouldn't at uc irvine and the author of the voting wars from florida 2000 to the next election meltdown. >> why do you think the lines are so damn long in this election? >> well, some of the reason is because there was a deliberate effort in ohio and florida and other places mostly with republican legislatures to cut back the numbers of days and hours of early voting. i think this was seen as a way of depressing democratic turnout. people seemed to stay in line for a long time but it certainly seemed to be intended to make it harder for people to vote. >> you have argued that congress should step in and do something to fix the problems. what power does congress hold here? >> well, you know, congress can do a lot more than you might think. because the constitutions gives congress the power to set the rules for congressional elections. it can't set the rules for local elections, but if it sets for local elections as it did in 1993, the states basically all come along and change their rules with it. the problem is not one of constitutional power but of political will.
is there going to be a movement after the president's comments to actually make changes in how we run our elections. >> what kinds of changes, if the political will was there, what kinds of changes originating with federal legislation are the kind of thing that you think would make a difference that could help. >> we could start big, small would be congress could provide incentives, money for states that implement early voting. you could have a federal ballot that just lists president and congress and senate on it and it would be a simple form. congress can mandate which machines are used. congress could, if we want to get broader, congress could set up a nonpartisan agency to administer our elections. let the federal government take over all voter registration and register every voter when a person turns 18, they get registered. when they move, turn in a change of address, your registration moves with you. we could do what most mature democracies do have a administration which is nonpart son and professional.
>> are there a couple of stalts that could be seen as models for the nation? to reflect best practices in the states where it works great, what kind of states should we look at at the model. >> there are pieces. at the state level, the state of wisconsin has a pretty good government accountability board but at the local ever level they've made all kinds of mistakes in the past. if we want to look for a model, i would look outside the country to australia, canada, almost all of these democracies have agencies and do a good job. >> imagine a election in the
modern united states in which the way that we voted was not one of the things that we had to worry about to make our decision between candidates. rick hasen, stu for being here tonight. i really appreciate it. >> thank you. >> if you tossed a billion dollars in cash into a fire place you would at least get warmth from it and the warmth would be more than america's moet noted pollute krats got this year and what they did with it. one you will almost certainly and you pick the price that works for you. great. whoa, whoa, jamie. watch where you point that thing. [ mocking ] "watch where you point that thing." you point yours, i point mine. okay, l-let's stay calm. [ all shouting ]
it's a victory for free speech. those who don't say campaigns will now be drowning in cooperate cash and influence. >> the vast majority of the money spent in this election, outside of the political parties and the candidates themselves, came from conservative groups, conservative groups just krishd liberal groups in this election, outspent them 3-1. liberal spend just about as much as they ever have in an election, but once the court made it okay for anybody to spend anything for any reason, the conservative spending went nuts while the liberal spending stayed about the same. now as the election night hangover is just about to wear off, the one thing to know is it didn't work. karl rove, they spent more than $100 million running ads in the general election. some ads supporting candidates all republicans and some ads opposing candidates, all democrats. of the candidates karl rove super pac supported in the general election, here's how many of those candidates won, zero. the u.s. chamber of commerce also got in on the senate race. they worked to oppose 11
democratic candidates for senate. last night despite that opposition, all of those candidates won their seats. at least the chamber of commerce did help to get dean heller elected in nevada. he accounted for 1/64 for the cham letter's overall spending this year. so there it's that victim for them. freedom works, only a quarter of their money was spent successfully, that's according to the sunlight foundation.
the individual conservative millionaires and billionaires this did he not fare much better, despite their deep faith in their own selves. sheldon addle son, then he bet on mitt romney to the tune of at least $34 million. mitt romney also last, should done is estimated to personally have spent $100 million to get no one elected this year. the coke brothers, and while dropping that cash may very made them feel important, the math said it was not money well spent.